Suchergebnisse

El artículo presenta una sencilla y resumida aproximación históricocanónica, examinando el trasfondo eclesiológico de los códigos de 1917 y 1983. En un primer momento se expone cuál es el marco histórico-espiritual del Código de 1917. Primero se presenta el contexto político-jurídico; se pasa, en un segundo momento, a exponer la situación eclesiológica del momento y las reflexiones en torno a la naturaleza específica del derecho, y, finalmente, se exponen las líneas eclesiológicas del Código de Derecho Canónico de 1917. Después se presenta el trasfondo eclesiológico del Código de 1983. Partiendo del momento político-jurídico, se presenta el momento eclesial del Código de 1983 y sus líneas eclesiológicas. ; The article presents a simple historical-canonical summary, examining the ecclesiastical background of the Codes of 1917 and 1983. Firstly, the historical-spiritual framework of the Code of 1917 is described. The political-legal context is presented; then the ecclesiastical situation of the time is explained, reflecting on the specific nature of the Law; finally, the ecclesiastical lines of the Code of Canon Law of 1917 is detailed. Next, the ecclesiastical background of the Code of 1983 is presented. Starting from the political-legal situation, the ecclesial situation of the Code of 1983 is presented with its ecclesiastical lines. ; Derecho canónico

The author designates the Croatian thinker Juraj Krizanic as a philosopher of politics, i.e. a modern political theorist who, on the one hand, founds his postulates on traditional theological thought, and, on the other, takes into account the postulates of modern political theory. As a theologian, Krizanic bases his conception of history and theology on the providentialism of St. Aurelius Augustine, and his political theory on the acceptance of a part of the thought of his contemporary Thomas Hobbes. The theoretical position -- political theology, positions him precisely between the political-theological postulates of Augustine and the political-theoretical hypotheses of Hobbes. In agreement with Augustine, Kriznic concludes that the political community (state) has its foundation in God and the values comprised in him, which is especially manifest in Providence and royal worship as basis of the internal structure of the state. But, in agreement with Hobbes, Krizanic understands that the mission of the state decreed by Providence operates within the earthly state and the secular political frameworks, and that, on the other hand, the king instituted by the will of God has his foundation also in the political body (the people), and this ranks Krizanic among the modern political theorists. Adapted from the source document.

Although our talk about human rights is part of the ethical awareness of contemporary politics, it still has not received adequate theoretical justification & foundation. Serious philosophical problems arose in the very beginning of the history of the "human rights" concept, with Locke's liberal natural right & Kant's reasonable right. According to the author, the difficulty stems from the concept of person, for in every liberal legal theory the person is perceived as bearer of human & fundamental rights. Meanwhile, the dominant constitutional theory of human & fundamental rights starts from the identical meanings of "person" as an individual, in its uniqueness, & of "man" as a general definition. It is, however, necessary to start from the fundamental difference between the two key concepts. While the "man" concept is defined universalistically, there is no universal concept for persons & no possibility of breaking them down into subcategories. While every individual, as instance of the concept, must be defined in the same way as everyone else, persons are defined individualistically; each person is a unique individual which can be neither duplicated nor multiplied. The author proposes a solution of the fundamental rights problem-matter within the framework of constitutional law. Personal rights are brought to existence as follows: organs of the state, in accordance with positive law, give to the individual the title of state-citizen as an individualistically unique legal person. Everyone receives it, in the same way, as a unique & irreplaceable person. In the normal conditions, the state has the obligation to make sure, via courts & the police, that everyone's personal right is untouchable. On the basis of this logic, a demarcation line can be drawn between the personal fundamental rights & the collective rights of citizens (such as political rights, which the individual can practice only together with others). Only such an interpretation would provide our libertarian fundamental rights with a consistently secular character, with no concession to the internal attachment, in whichever way it may be concealed, to metaphysical or religious presuppositions. Adapted from the source document.

This paper proposes that Secularity is not only a political model that prescribes a separa-tion between the State & the Churches, but a model that entails a complete scheme of thought, a very intellectual project, which must be considered in contrast & opposition with other doctrines. In this way, the author offers a definition of the minimal content of a Secular project. Adapted from the source document.

In this paper, the author vindicates the idea of a secular Ethics, proudly stressed as an independent domain facing the religious claims. This idea is shaped in a positive way & finds its foundation in the concept of human dignity. To achieve this goal, the paper analyses the idea of human dignity in its relationship with the concept of autonomy, following both of them since Picco della Mirandola's work to Immanuel Kant's philosophy. Adapted from the source document.

Liberalism; secularism; Egypt; politics and government; history; 1900-1950

In this article we propose that Habermas´ account of the role of religion in the public sphere follows the Aristotelian model of distributive justice. After presenting a way in which Aristotle´s notion of distributive justice can be used to assess participation within political debates, the text will relate such a presentation with Habermas´ discussion on the role of religion in the public sphere of a deliberative democracy. Finally, in the third part of the text, we will present some conclusions. ; La tesis que se quiere plantear, en este artículo, es la relación que tiene la propuesta de Habermas, sobre el rol de la religión en la esfera pública, con el modelo aristotélico de la justicia distributiva. En primer lugar, se tendrá en cuenta, la forma en la que la noción de justicia distributiva de Aristoteles puede servir para valorar la participación en los debates políticos. Luego, el artículo, relacionará tal exposición con la discusión de Habermas sobre el rol de la religión en la esfera pública de unademocracia deliberativa. Finalmente, en la tercera parte, se presentarán algunas conclusiones.

This essay attempts to analyse the political, economic, social and religious history of Iran in the 20th. Century. It begins with a critical study of the Pahlavi dynasty and continues with Iran's Shi'ite Islamic Revolution led by the Ayatullah Khumayni, enemy of the Shah and founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran in February 1979. Khumayni proposed the political, economic and social possibility that religion would be an alternative to capitalism, to the dynasty in power, to secularism and to the Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi. Khumayni`s regime was also abusive, and came to be as repressive as the Shah's. Iran's extreme nationalization plans under Khumayni's goverment experienced a systematic process of revisions, obviously after Khumayni's death in 1989. These revisions and changes in the politics, and the economy of the country led to an increasing opening to privatization, capitalism and globalization due to the more moderate governments that followed after Khumayni's death, mainly those of Rafsanjani and Khatami. The contrast between the two periods of the Islamic Republic is so evident that a Second Republic of Iran was founded and developed. This essay analyses these issues up to Khatami's government and it has a historical, social, economic and their political interpretation. ; : Este ensayo analiza la historia política, económica, social y religiosa de Irán en el siglo XX. Inicia con la dinastía Pahlavi y continúa con la Revolución Islámica Shi'ita de Irán dirigida por el Ayatullah Khumayni, opositor del Shah y fundador de la República Islámica de Irán en febrero de 1979. Con Khumayni se planteó la posibilidad política, económica y social de la religión como alternativa al capitalismo, al secularismo, a la dinastía y a la dictadura del Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi. También durante el gobierno de Khumayni se llegaron a cometer muchos y grandes abusos y el sistema resultó tan represivo como al que derrocó. Los planes de nacionalización extremos de Irán durante el gobierno de Khumayni tuvieron una revisión sistemática y una apertura constante hacia la privatización, hacia el capitalismo y la globalización con los gobiernos más moderados de Rafsanjani, como se estudia en este ensayo. El contraste entre ambos períodos de la República Islámica de Irán es evidente, al punto que se dio lugar a la fundación de la Segunda República de Irán. Este trabajo estudia esos períodos hasta llegar al gobierno de Muhammad Khatami, todo explicado desde una perspectiva histórica, social, económica y política.

En el presente ensayo se formula la tesis, aparentemente paradójica, según la cual el principio de laicidad y la idea de comunidad política salen reforzados en la medida en que un gobierno sea capaz de arbitrar medidas que aseguren que la religión progrese y goce del mayor desarrollo y consideración posibles. Además, para poner a prueba su virtualidad, se conecta la tesis, así formulada, con un problema práctico, como es si la ley debería permitir el aborto alguna vez, y si es así, bajo qué circunstancias. La conclusión que se extrae es que, al presentar las diferencias de opinión en este tema como diferencias religiosas, se está contribuyendo a la unión política, pues estamos acostumbrados a la idea de que es posible convivir a pesar de que existen profundas diferencias en materia religiosa. El ensayo concluye con una contextualización de la citada tesis en el marco de la tradición política del liberalismo, tomando como referentes a Ronald Dworkin (su autor) y a John Rawls. ; At this paper a thesis is formulated, apparently paradoxical, according to which the principle of secularism and the idea of political community are strengthened to the extent that a government is able to enact measures in order to ensure that religion develops and it is respected. In addition, in order to test its potentiality, thesis is related with a practical problem, whether the law should allow abortion ever, and if so, under what circumstances. The conclusion is that, if we introduce the differences of opinion on this issue as religious differences, we are contributing to political union, because we are accustomed to the idea that it is possible to live together despite deep religious differences. The paper concludes with a contextualization of that thesis at the context of the political tradition of liberalism (by Ronald Dworkin, who is his author, and by John Rawls).